Re. (Sans?) Serif

[Geoff Hart <geoff-h -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA>]

     Karen Davis asked about the relative readability of sans serif vs.
     serif type.

     I've read (sorry, couldn't find the specific journal reference, but
     I'll keep looking) that an opthalmologist/psychologist did the
     research on this 10 or more years ago, and discovered fairly
     conclusively that the serifs increase the visual differentiation
     between characters and thus make serif type more readable; since
     recognizing differences requires that there _be_ differences, the
     conclusion seems to have been based on the idea that emphasizing
     differences between character shapes makes them easier to recognize
     and thus read. (To forestall the inevitable reply: No, this doesn't
     mean that you should use Times for the letter T, Helvetica for the
     letter e, Zapf chancery for the letter x and Zapf dingbats for the
     period at the end of the sentence. You can only carry a conclusion so
     far, and besides, there's also good anecdotal evidence that "ransom
     note" typography is far less readable.)

     This matches my own experience. I find sans serif generally hard to
     read for any length of time, and I make far more proofreading errors
     when I edit sans serif printouts. One compromise that seems to work
     well is to use a sans serif font with variable stroke widths:
     traditional serif fonts use almost perfectly constant stroke widths,
     and thus seem more similar, whereas more modern forms such as Stone
     Sans taper the stroke widths at the ends of strokes and in other
     places. Yes, I do find these fonts far easier to read than strict
     serif fonts, sometimes even as readable as serif fonts.

     One final note: Some of the increased readability of serif fonts is a
     learned skill. I have asked a few Europeans about their preference
     (since many Scandinavian and other publications use exclusively sans
     serif for body text) and they told me that they never noticed this
     fact, and didn't actually find our serif publications dramatically
     easier to read. Again, a learning effect? Bottom line: For a North
     American audience, stick with serif for large amounts of text. For
     Europeans, consider using sans serif... but test your choice on your
     audience. If you have to be consistent between both versions, and
     there's a strong sans serif lobby, aim for a modern sans serif such as
     Stone Sans, which has the improved readability of serif and the "look
     and feel" of sans.

     --Geoff Hart   geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca
     #8^{)}   <---got these specs from reading too much online info!